I was going to write an article here about growing older, aspects that people seem to miss because of they are subtle, and why old people are the way they are.

I decided not to bother. A while back I posted what I thought was a decent and underappreciated find over the "What are you listening to right now?" thread. I even asked people to be mature about their responses (this was actually targeted to one person), but no, as usual, the single spoiled brat, who clings to this place the way mold and mildew cling to bathroom walls, had to ruin it. A couple of days ago I tried to start a small scale subject about current job related experiences, and once again the spoiled and unwelcome brat reared his ugly head. Yes we have free speech, doesn't make it welcome speech, doesn't make it worthwhile speech. Crap is still crap, B/S is still B/S, stupidity and arrogance do not excel or become worthy because of free speech. Please stop hiding behind "free speech", we all realize that several decades ago when most people thought of someone as a posterior orifice they were embarrassed by it. Today, like many adolescents, your kind wear this label as a badge of honor. Really, could you possibly have set your goals for worthiness any lower?

So instead of contributing something worthwhile and thought provoking I decided to forget it. I may as well talk to the local immature brats that hang out at the local park. At least they won't be hiding behind anonymity while they are arrogant.

To paraphrase Judd Nelson - I suggest you and Bluefront get together and go bowling.

_________________People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither﻿ patriots nor human beings.

Why don't you try one more time, but try putting a tighter definition on the scope of the discussion. Then make liberal use of the complaint button when someone exceeds. If you pay close attention you will see that the "Conservative Repubs" of this forum make excessive use of the complaint button... but the putative "Liberals/Progressives" seem to never use it.

Well the Canadians were asked if they wanted to remove their version of the Fairness Doctrine, and they as a group oppose it. Simply put they don't want to see their commentary degrade to the level of US style commentary. Is there any need to ask which political group wanted it eliminated and why they felt so strongly that eliminating it was absolutely neccessary? One quick listen to AM talk radio will answer that question for you without any response from me.

Too many in the US believe that they win an argument by making the last comment or by shouting LOSER the loudest (hence radio talk shows where the last word is locked up by the host). This is what "civilization" has been reduced to in what used to be a great country. In the 60's the underdog was cheered for, now the mob mentality rules.

Why bother?

_________________People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither﻿ patriots nor human beings.

Why don't you try one more time, but try putting a tighter definition on the scope of the discussion. Then make liberal use of the complaint button when someone exceeds. If you pay close attention you will see that the "Conservative Repubs" of this forum make excessive use of the complaint button... but the putative "Liberals/Progressives" seem to never use it.

I will leave it to your imagination to determine why that is so.

Care to name names? I am not sure I have ever used it, or at most one time when someone made a vicious ad hominem attack, maybe a few years ago.

I meant to be very general and frankly don't have any idea of what squabbles may have been taken place here. Anyway, a single person can't "ruin it" unless one lets what he writes get to you.

By any definition that I have seen of a troll, they are the ones who start these inflammatory threads, and then lambaste anyone who dares to disagree with them. You can figure out who they are for yourself.

Of course you don't lambaste, you simply make personal attacks. How intellectual.

Actually I am more of a shoe delivery person, I let others figure out which shoe fits.

Quote:

Anyway I wish I had a clip of this wonderfully astute Mexican comedian I saw the other night. He was talking about how he was invited to town meeting to talk about what needs to be done and how to spend money, etc. And the person inviting him asks, "First I need to know are you a republican or are you a democrat?" And the comedian replies, "Neither." So the guy asks him , Well, why?"

And the comedian replies with totally accuracy and honesty

"Well I consider myself to be somewhat intelligent, and frankly, I simply don't like being 50% wrongALL THE FUCKING TIME!

And the crowd went wild.

_________________People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither﻿ patriots nor human beings.

Of course you don't lambaste, you simply make personal attacks. How intellectual.

On the contrary. I may disagree, but I offer reasons why I disagree. It seems that your are generally upset with the thoroughness of my responses, and not because they involve personal attacks.

You, on the other hand, seem to be upset as a matter of principle that anyone would dare disagree with your posts, and then you engage in repeated and profuse ad hominem attacks, like the ones above. It sounds to me like you would be happier on your own blog, where you could post what you want, and censor those comments you dislike.

When you state "no wonder you're still unemployed" or remarks about mimicking sheep that's hardly intellectual.

Quote:

that anyone would dare disagree with your posts

Like Bluefront you intentionally or not misinterpret what others say, and always in your favor. It's a common tactic of Faux pundits as well. I'm aware you will leave no room for improvement.

I welcome intelligent interaction, but I've also proven you haven't provided any. Notice how you have no comments about the Mexican comedian, and the theater with hundreds, if not thousands, of people who know for a fact you and your kind are fools. Partisanship is nothing more than an acceptable cult. That's why some choose a candidate through research, whoda thunk?

I read The Economist because it's an impartial, nicely written, and respectable conservative magazine. So again, your pseudo-logic and Faux-observations fail to impress or convince.

_________________People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither﻿ patriots nor human beings.

So again, your pseudo-logic and Faux-observations fail to impress or convince

m0002a wrote:

it appears you also need some education in syllogisms and logic, because your argument is non sequitur... I think you mean you're (or "you are"), not your... I don't believe that my opinion has a higher value than anyone else's.... Considering your lack of literacy as displayed in the post above, and your intolerance to allow those with other opinions to post, it is no wonder you had such a hard time finding a job.... I don't think my responses are any more contentious than yours, and usually much less so. I do try to make them well thought out and provide the best arguments that I can muster to support my views, but I don't see how that is threatening to anyone.... Do you have arthritis, or having some keyboard problems, or what?.... If there ever was a US President who was agnostic or atheist, I would put all my money on Obama... If there ever was a US President who was agnostic or atheist, I would put all my money on Obama... Your entire theory about American power, comparing it to the English, French, etc colonial power, is upside-down and back-ass-wards.... I would bet my life that they ("Dubya and Perry") are a lot more intelligent than you are.... The Third Reich was lead by many very intelligent and high educated men, who enjoyed the Opera at night, and committed genocide during their day job.... That is absurd. I did not compare anyone's beliefs to the Nazi's or Adolf Hitler.... as Socrates pointed out, rhetoric in general (and what the Sophists are skilled at) is the ability to make the poorer argument appear to be the better. ... Looks to me that Democrats are recruiting wackos to discredit the Republican "black man," ...I am sure that in your own mind, all the world’s problems can be blamed on Bush and the Republicans, but I don't think that analysis holds ups under scrutiny. You are not even remotely interested in the truth, only in political demagoguery and name calling, so civilized discussion of these issues is useless....

Res Ipsa Loquitor (for those of lesser refinement, this is Latin for "the thing speaks for itself")

"Aristotle calls man the rational animal. All my life I have been seeking evidence to confirm this" Bertrand Russell

You know Ces, I used to work with this pompous Greek from Greece (too many like this). Well one day in his usual superior manner he was talking down to some other coworkers, "Don't you know Greeks gave you democracy? They gave you calculus?"

And despite our shared lineage I just couldn't stand it anymore. So I said, "Yes, and they also gave us homosexuality and venereal disease." And people laughed, patted me on the back, and bought me coffee.

I love Bertrand Russell. He could make The Comedy Channel the #1 cable channel all by himself.

_________________People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither﻿ patriots nor human beings.

You know Ces, I used to work with this pompous Greek from Greece (too many like this). Well one day in his usual superior manner he was talking down to some other coworkers, "Don't you know Greeks gave you democracy? They gave you calculus?"

Maybe the Greeks discovered Geometry, but I think Calculus is jointly credited to Leibniz and Newton.

I guess I should be thankful that you guys don't make ad hominem attacks against me, or else things would really get nasty. Wouldn't it be more civilized and rational to stick to substantive subjects instead of the silly name calling?

I guess I should be thankful that you guys don't make ad hominem attacks against me, or else things would really get nasty. Wouldn't it be more civilized and rational to stick to substantive subjects instead of the silly name calling?

civilized - yesrational - no

m0002a wrote:

it appears you also need some education in syllogisms and logic, because your argument is non sequitur... I think you mean you're (or "you are"), not your... I don't believe that my opinion has a higher value than anyone else's.... Considering your lack of literacy as displayed in the post above, and your intolerance to allow those with other opinions to post, it is no wonder you had such a hard time finding a job.... I don't think my responses are any more contentious than yours, and usually much less so. I do try to make them well thought out and provide the best arguments that I can muster to support my views, but I don't see how that is threatening to anyone.... Do you have arthritis, or having some keyboard problems, or what?.... If there ever was a US President who was agnostic or atheist, I would put all my money on Obama... If there ever was a US President who was agnostic or atheist, I would put all my money on Obama... Your entire theory about American power, comparing it to the English, French, etc colonial power, is upside-down and back-ass-wards.... I would bet my life that they ("Dubya and Perry") are a lot more intelligent than you are.... The Third Reich was lead by many very intelligent and high educated men, who enjoyed the Opera at night, and committed genocide during their day job.... That is absurd. I did not compare anyone's beliefs to the Nazi's or Adolf Hitler.... as Socrates pointed out, rhetoric in general (and what the Sophists are skilled at) is the ability to make the poorer argument appear to be the better. ... Looks to me that Democrats are recruiting wackos to discredit the Republican "black man," ...I am sure that in your own mind, all the world’s problems can be blamed on Bush and the Republicans, but I don't think that analysis holds ups under scrutiny. You are not even remotely interested in the truth, only in political demagoguery and name calling, so civilized discussion of these issues is useless....

It is from the aspect that it's very offensive if you aren't friends with whom you use it on, andf even then how and when you use it. Only the racial aspects are missing from it, everything else applies.

Just as the N word is not offensive when used among close friends.

_________________People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither﻿ patriots nor human beings.

In the grand scheme of things what you propose is to ignore one grain of sand on a beach. Besides the sheer futility of this move the question would then become what makes this grain of sand any more significant than all the others? And the answer to that question is absolutely nothing.

I do have to laugh and the 21st Century century of PC. In this day and age you can condemn and foul mouth an entire race, an entire religious group, an entire political group, whatever group one decides are a bunch of losers, but you can't do the same with an individual. If you look closely the former includes the KKK, Hitler, Christian extremists, Muslim extremists, and Faux News pundits. The latter includes us, the ones being governed, who frankly haven't killed or hurt anyone. What's wrong with this picture?

_________________People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither﻿ patriots nor human beings.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum